Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Yeah I agree with you, banning flights from specific countries is pointless, I wasn’t the one making the point though.
Yeah I agree with you, banning flights from specific countries is pointless, I wasn’t the one making the point though.It’s a fair point Sick Boy and the US banned flights from China on 3 or 4 Feb (think we only banned flights from Wuhan), however, I’m not convinced it did either country much good as by then the virus was already in the respective countries
Hindsight’s a great thing but in reality from what I can see (I might be wrong) youve got to pretty much ban all flights/international travel at very early stage (or the world leaders all agree travel ban from the high risk areas). One example would be that there’s little point Italy banning flights from China if the rest of the EU doesn’t (with freedom of movement).
Once the pandemic is reasonably wide spread any partial travel bans (other than very high risk areas) probably have little effect.
The international coordination in response to the pandemic has been poor (don’t get me started on China and their initial suppression of information)
Oh it’s our biggest advantage no question and yes we could have locked our borders immediately and should have done. Whatever you think of this government it’s essentially weak and liberal on its thinking and courts popular thinking. If they’d done it the outrage regarding its racist, xenophobic behaviour would have been confirmed. The Rachel Riley stalkier would have been in full flow and everyone pretty much in here would have been outraged
Churchill would have locked the borders and anyone who’s travelled from China, Italy and Spain would be against their will isolated
and everyone on here would squeal racist Tory
I think if children going skiing in Italy in January were forcibly detained for two weeks afterwards there would have been outrage. I do think the one thing the government could and should have done is locked borders and detained all nationals from high infected areas for two weeks and then cancelled all future travel but I also think the backlash would have been horrific.
So do the British.The Italians seemed less than happy
'As if we were the disease': coronavirus brings prejudice for Italy's Chinese workers
Agree Ian. I can’t see international travel getting fully back to normal until much later this year at the earliest anyway. It surely should be in our thinking when agreeing exit from lockdown strategy (no point us getting it under control and allowing travellers from high risk areas in).
However, do you allow travel from non high risk areas/countries with similar transmission rates to ourselves ?! My view is probably yes (as travel numbers will probably be significantly lower compared to a normal year) but then again, if those countries are allowing high risk travellers into their countries the problem remains.
tricky !
Some of the Spanish don't like their medical workers either,getting abused by those they live near to
We could let them in but test for symptoms and/or make them isolate and provide details of travel plans etc. Ideally we could test them on arrival properly but not feasible (at the moment anyway).
Mind you, we should have done that from the start.
Smokers 80% less likely to get the virus?
French researchers to test nicotine patches on coronavirus patients
I had a problem with the weird mask wearing.
Sure I read something the other day saying they were more likely!!
Made this point last week. (I think. Dates & times blurry now
Smokers 80% less likely to get the virus?
French researchers to test nicotine patches on coronavirus patients
I don’t think anything is supposed to be delivered yet is it? There’s schedules for delivery to meet demand as it’s needed based on information from those that took part in the scheme. It set out to find new suppliers and manufacturers for PPE and other medical supplies and as far as I understand they succeeded in that. If the first scheduled delivery is missed then the article may have a point.
Some of the praise of Sweden is a bit misleading. They are still experiencing growth in cases and growth in deaths. The nature of their demographics, high proportion of people live alone, pop density etc seems to have just meant they had to implement fewer measures compared to some other countries. They have one of the worst death rates per million people, in the top ten worse affected countries, far higher than the neighbouring countries, bar the Netherlands who also had a softer approach. I should think at some point they will have to implement tougher measures to bend the curve and not overwhelm their healthcare system (in fairness I think they acknowledge it's early days and this may happen, from what I have read). Of course, they have the advantage of having further measures in their arsenal.
The libertarian "we need to open the economy as soon as possible, you don't understand that lockdown could do as much damage as the disease" types mainly. As if nobody is noticing they are not at work or the constant barrage of forecast on the economic damage.Who is praising Sweden? Is it the herd immunity pushers? They present a superficial of everything
Who is praising Sweden? Is it the herd immunity pushers? They present a superficial of everything
Some of the praise of Sweden is a bit misleading. They are still experiencing growth in cases and growth in deaths. The nature of their demographics, high proportion of people live alone, pop density etc seems to have just meant they had to implement fewer measures compared to some other countries. They have one of the worst death rates per million people, in the top ten worse affected countries, far higher than the neighbouring countries, bar the Netherlands who also had a softer approach. I should think at some point they will have to implement tougher measures to bend the curve and not overwhelm their healthcare system (in fairness I think they acknowledge it's early days and this may happen, from what I have read). Of course, they have the advantage of having further measures in their arsenal.
The guess is it is nicotine. But as usual many seem to know more than the specialists know.It’s on about nicotine not all the damage done to your lungs which makes you vastly more vulnerable to serious problems.
The guess is it is nicotine. But as usual many seem to know more than the specialists know.
About 50% of smokers die from a smoking related cause. Fact.
In France over 25% of the population still smoke. Fact.
In France only about 5% of those with the virus are smokers. Seemingly a Fact.
The big question is how come smokers who have respiratory problems have an 80% lower chance of getting a respiratory based virus. This could be the start of a breakthrough.
So what do the experts on here say?
The guess is it is nicotine. But as usual many seem to know more than the specialists know.
About 50% of smokers die from a smoking related cause. Fact.
In France over 25% of the population still smoke. Fact.
In France only about 5% of those with the virus are smokers. Seemingly a Fact.
The big question is how come smokers who have respiratory problems have an 80% lower chance of getting a respiratory based virus. This could be the start of a breakthrough.
So what do the experts on here say?
Those of us that are looking for clues on what will happen next will agree with you. Those of us that know more than the experts will think you are mad.As I say above I’m not supporting their strategy but the death rates are a strange one until you know how many in the population has it/has had it. Even the best testing (major) nations haven’t really got a clue, only estimates from some relatively low number antibody sampling
If for example after testing we find out that half the population in Sweden has had it at the current number of deaths then it would put a totally different slant on the argument
I’m not saying that’s the case at all but you get the point.
That and shielding perhapsI say this is not the news I needed on my one week anniversary of quitting.
Devils advocate: could it be that at the age profile corona kicks in those with weak lungs have already been weeded out?
The real test would be vapers I reckon. Or those getting direct nicotine some other way.
That is why they are testing nicotine patches. But who knows.It’s fascinating isn’t it. I think I read that smokers are less likely to get it but if they do are at a higher risk. Might be wrong though
I'm about 2 years into packing the weed in. Now vaping faster than usual to protect myselfI say this is not the news I needed on my one week anniversary of quitting.
Devils advocate: could it be that at the age profile corona kicks in those with weak lungs have already been weeded out?
The real test would be vapers I reckon. Or those getting direct nicotine some other way.
So smokers are 80% better of 'shielding' than non smokers?That and shielding perhaps
Just completed 21 days cold turkey .I say this is not the news I needed on my one week anniversary of quitting.
Devils advocate: could it be that at the age profile corona kicks in those with weak lungs have already been weeded out?
The real test would be vapers I reckon. Or those getting direct nicotine some other way.
It is all lies if it doesn't say what some want it to say.Where are people going for the latest statistics updates for the UK?
find the BBC UK home page buries stuff so it’s hard to find. Would like to see updated charts and daily figures, etc.
Thanks!
Well done. That is good going.Just completed 21 days cold turkey .
Still reckon if I took a walk up to the local shop to buy some milk I'd cave.
Did 2 weeks off the ale as well
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?